Posted on 07/15/2015 5:25:02 AM PDT by bestintxas
Mark Levin has been shouting until he is blue in the face that this truly awful nuclear deal with Iran has been made possible only with the help of Senate Republicans, who passed a bill (99-1, with Tom Cotton of Arkansas the only sane dissenter) making it nearly impossible to stop Obama's agreement with the ayatollahs:
Normally, here's how treaties work: the President negotiates a treaty with another country, like the deal he is negotiating with Iran over its nuclear weapons development. Once the treaty is negotiated, it's submitted to the Senate. Two thirds of the Senate has to vote to approve, or ratify, the treaty. If two thirds do not support it, it is not binding.
But the bill the Congress sent to the President turns things on its head. It will allow the President to lift sanctions on Iran, and unless Congress objects with a 2/3 vote within 30 days, the President's actions are allowed to stand. See the reversal? Formerly, the President needed a 2/3 vote to act, and now the Congress needs a 2/3 vote to stop him from acting. And be assured the Democrats will never let the Republicans get that many votes.
Cruz, Rubio and Paul fought this measure procedurely, at first... but then voted for it on final passage. Totally inexplicable. And totally wrong, from a policy and constitutional perspective.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Everything you said is true. I’m resigning from all party organizations.
Our so-called government has been subverted by traitors. Democrat, Republican, Independent, Socialist, Communist - it doesn’t matter; they are ALL complicit in treason.
We are no better today than when British kings ruled over us. In many ways, we are WORSE off. WE CHOSE THESE TRAITORS TO TAKE OUR FREEDOM AWAY.
We can no longer hide our shame, claiming we did not know. We know now and our response is to allow them to continue taking our freedoms. I am 74 years old, incapable to lead. But know this, I was born a free man and I will die as one. MY KNEE BENDS TO NO ONE EXCEPT HE WHO MADE ME.
“Sure seems like if the Constitution says a treaty must be approved by the Senate”
This isn’t a treaty. I wish someone would explain to me why Congress passed that bill saying that it will take a 2/3 majority of both houses to halt the deal.
They had to pass it in order to see what is in it? How else to explain?
Bingo! Furthermore, suppose that the next President revokes the deal, and tries to reimpose sanctions on Iran. Europe will be very reluctant to go along with that. After all, there is a "deal" in place that everyone once agreed to.
This is what happens when you don’t follow the Constitution. We have a lot of people sitting in the Senate and House exercising really poor judgment. And that’s scarier than Obama.
NOT a treaty?
“A treaty is a formal, written agreement between sovereign states or between states and international organizations. In the United States, treaties are negotiated through the executive branch, which includes the Department of State.”
I don’t care if they call it a Protocol, a Deal or a Wish-List...this is still a TREATY.
There, if I get a chance, I plan to ask Senator Cruz why he voted to turn the Constitution's treaty-ratification process on its head, making Obama king, and requiring 2/3rds of the Senate to vote AGAINST the treaty to keep it from becoming law.
For someone who claims to revere the Constitution, Cruz's vote—only Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas) voted nay—leaves me dumbfounded. (I saw his explanation but, really? Is the Iran deal NOT a treaty?!)
Care to ping your Cruz list to this one, SoConPubbie? Perhaps you or one of them can enlighten me as to why the Corker Iran bill was better than no bill at all.
“this is still a TREATY.”
You raise another good question. Who decided that it isn’t a treaty, assuming that legally it isn’t, and I assume it isn’t since it doesn’t require the constitutionally required vote of both houses of congress.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
I disagree, once the sanctions are gone at the UN it's over.
And the President is presenting this as an executive agreement. I don't know what that is or what standing it has. He doesn't either, just can't call it a treaty.
A case can be made that impeachment is overdue on a variety of charges, perhaps including this, but that's not politically feasible, and is a political rather than legal solution.
1) UN sanctions would be gone because (an unrespected and weak) Obama is incapable of holding it together.
2) US sanctions on Iran were set/approved by congress; Obama has no authority to sidestep and ignore the law and force congress to pass a new law just so he can veto it. Therefore if (an unrespected and weak) congress accepts his premise shame on them.
3) If it is a long-term negotiated international “agreement”, it is a treaty regardless of what Obama wants to call it. He can call it a banana if he wants to, but it is still what it is.
4) Treaty at Dictionary.com
...1. a formal agreement between two or more states in reference to peace, alliance, commerce, or other international relations.
...2. the formal document embodying such an international agreement.
5) The Republicans in both house and senate are letting Obama define the rules so it IS their fault. Pussies.
“it isn’t since it doesn’t require the constitutionally required vote of both houses of congress.”
OR
It isn’t because both houses of congress refuse to require a vote.
Something stinks, huh?
Oh, it STILL requires the Congress; just because THEY passed an illegal Law (which, IMO, will *NEVER* be considered as such...it would open the floodgates to lawsuits vs. the EPA, TSA, etc. etc. IE: CONGRESS makes Law, they cannot delegate their responsibilities to unelected w/out an amendment) doesn’t make it moot.
Course, I haven’t heard word one from any ‘in the ring’ about the illegality or how it’s NOT a treaty....
And, yes, I too would love to see/hear how it was re-defined. Most likely, it was only DEEMED by the ‘resident as such and the ever eager media parrots the same w/out question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.